MAIN COMMITTEE

The Main Committee convened for the first time at 4:00 pm Monday
afternoon. The Chair, Dr. Fred Sai (Ghana), opened the session and
urged delegates to agree on a document that will produce music that
is harmonious enough for the media, rather than the cacophony they
have been spreading. He asked delegates to please forget everything
they have read in the press and to read the full document. He also
urged delegates to restrict themselves to debate on text where
agreement has not been reached.

Sai announced that agreement has been reached on the composition of
the bureau: Amb. Lionel Hurst (Antigua and Barbuda); Nicolaas
Biegman (The Netherlands); Dr. Bal G. Baidya (Nepal) and Jerzy
Holzer (Poland), who will also serve as the rapporteur.

The Chair attempted to begin the substantive work of the Committee.
He announced that during the intersessional period informal
consultations on outstanding matters were held in New York and he
asked the coordinators to report their results. Canada reported on
an informal meeting on 13 July to discuss the two chapters not
negotiated at PrepCom III: Preamble and Principles. Delegates
agreed that the Preamble should be shortened and serve as an
introduction to the Programme of Action. With regard to the
Principles, participants agreed that there should be fewer
principles, which should be reordered and merged. Language from
other documents and treaties should be quoted accurately and in
context. The right to development does not receive enough emphasis
and the relationship to population and development should also
reflect environmental protection.

Indonesia reported on the consultations on goals, which took place
on 14 July. He elaborated on the quantitative goals: education;
reduction in child and maternal mortality; and access to
reproductive health and family planning. The goals should be
attainable, realistic and consider the situation in each country.

The Netherlands reported on the consultations on resources, which
met on 15 July and focused on the cost estimates in Chapter 13. It
was agreed that there were no better figures available. There was
a brief discussion of the 20:20 Compact, but participants agreed
that it should be refined further and brought forward at the Social
Summit in Copenhagen.

CHAPTER I -- PREAMBLE: During the discussion, several
procedural debacles slowed the Committee's progress. The Chair
proposed that a small "informal-informal" group meet and develop a
"non-paper" on the Preamble and Principles. Several delegates
expressed concern. Algeria, on behalf of the G-77, said that the
position of the G-77 has always been that the proliferation of
working groups raises problems for small delegations. These
discussions should take place in a clear, transparent framework.
Sai said that this informal-informal could meet when the Main
Committee is not meeting. Since a number of delegates wanted to do
a first reading of the document in the Main Committee, the Chair
asked for comments on the Preamble.

Both the G-77 and the EU circulated written proposals on the
Preamble and the Principles. The meeting was suspended for 15
minutes to allow delegations to review the texts. When the meeting
reconvened, problems immediately developed as various G-77 members
proposed amendments to the G-77 draft text. The Chair and Algeria
appealed to delegates to consult with the G-77 Chair before
presenting amendments. Each time the Chair tried to move the
discussion forward, procedural debate crept in. Finally, the Chair
announced that he would consult with various delegations and
produce a new document.

CHAPTER II -- PRINCIPLES: Algeria, on behalf of the G-77,
introduced a new draft of Chapter II with a few amendments. The EU
acknowledged this new draft, but said that he needed time to
consult with his group. A number of G-77 members then proposed
amendments to the draft and Algeria had to note that the text had
been already endorsed by the Group.

Mali expressed some reservation with regard to Principle 5, which
calls for an end to unsustainable patterns of production and
consumption, since some developing countries might have problems
meeting this goal.

Iran suggested that in Principle 7 of the G-77 text, the reference
to individuals should be deleted. El Salvador suggested that the
word "individuals" be replaced with "persons." Honduras suggested
an amendment to Principle 7 that would reiterate the universal
right to life, liberty and security of the person.

On Principle 8, China suggested adding "without any form of
coercion" and deleting the reference to some specific forms of
coercion. Algeria answered that Principle 8 should not be
discussed, but considered in brackets until the issues it deals
with are addressed in the discussion of Chapters 7 and 8. The
Philippines and Pakistan agreed that the phrase "sexual and" be
deleted in the reference to the right to health care services. The
Philippines, supported by Indonesia, said that abortion should in
no way be considered a method of family planning.

The Holy See said that this set of principles should also refer to
the duty that the international community has in matters of human
rights violations. El Salvador suggested that the rights provided
in Principle 1 should be balanced with matching duties and that
Principle 10 should make clear that the family is the basic unit of
society. Iran asked that the reference to various forms of the
family be deleted in Principle 10.

The US suggested a series of amendments on the principal objective
of the Programme of Action, gender equity and equality, migrants,
indigenous communities and references to sustainable development.
The Chair asked the US to submit these amendments in writing.

Benin stressed that the Committee needs to improve its working
methods and begin a paragraph-by-paragraph discussion. Belize and
Malawi made some amendments to the G-77 proposal and South Africa
expressed the desire to see due recognition of the sovereign rights
of each nation referred to in the chapeau.